Malibu Media v. John Does 1-42

Filing 14

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 11 Motion to Quash filed by an unidentified Doe Defendant, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 9/10/2012. (mehcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01953-WYD-MEH
PATRICK COLLINS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOES 1-42,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on September 10, 2012.
Pending before the Court is a Motion to Quash [filed September 7, 2012; docket #11] filed
by an unidentified Doe Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”). The Motion is denied without
prejudice for several reasons. First, Defendant has not complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a)(1)(D)
and D.C. Colo. LCivR 5.1G. Rule 5(a)(1)(D) requires that a written motion filed with the Court
must be served on every party. Local Rule 5.1G requires, in pertinent part, that “[e]ach paper, other
than one filed ex parte, shall be accompanied by a certificate of service indicating the date it was
served, the name and address of the person to whom it was sent, and the manner of service.” Upon
review of Defendant’s Motion [docket #11] and Memorandum [docket #13], the Court sees no
evidence of service on Plaintiff’s counsel.
Second, Plaintiff has failed to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), which states in pertinent
part,
Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one
attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party personally if the party is
unrepresented. The paper must state the signer’s address, email address, and
telephone number.
From the content of the present motion, the Court infers that Defendant seeks to proceed in this
litigation anonymously. However, he has failed to seek permission from the Court to do so. See KBeech, Inc. v. Does 1-29, 826 F. Supp. 2d 903, 905 (W.D.N.C. 2011) (noting that a party who wishes
to proceed anonymously may overcome the presumption against anonymous proceedings by filing
a well-reasoned motion to proceed anonymously); see also West Coast Prods., Inc. v. Does 1-5829,
275 F.R.D. 9, 12 (D.D.C. 2011) (“federal courts generally allow parties to proceed anonymously
only under certain special circumstances when anonymity is necessary to protect a person from
harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment”). Therefore, if Defendant wishes to re-file

his motion in accordance with this order and all applicable local and federal court rules, he must first
(or contemporaneously) file a motion to proceed anonymously and provide to the Court his name,
address, telephone number and email address in accordance with Rule 11(a) and D.C. Colo. LCivR
10.1K. If Defendant wishes to keep his identifying information confidential, Defendant may file
his Signature Block separately, and may request that the document be maintained under Restriction
Level 2 pursuant to the procedure set forth in D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.2. The Court may strike any
motion or other filing that deviates from the requirements of this order or from those set forth in the
applicable local or federal rules.